“As for Hubbard’s eye injury: Hubbard was reading the medical texts at Oak Knoll while claiming later to Dianetics readers that he was crippled and blind in this period.”

Hubbard would have been reading texts while suffering from chronic actinic conjunctivitis (a UV caused eye injury), three years after something “blinded” him in the South Pacific, where he also broke or sprained his right foot — all documented in his Navy medical records. From 1945-1948, doctors describe him as “lame” and “walking with a hobble-like gait”, witnesses describe him as using a cane, and friends describe him as “wounded” and “injured”. The VA ultimately gave him 40% service-related disability, with a quarter of it for the eye injury, another quarter for the ulcer, and half for the resultant bursitis and arthritis. As mentioned, this is all documented in Hubbard’s service records.

“Hubbard was driving a car and attending writer’s meetings in this period.”

Hubbard wasn’t lying comatose in a hospital bed, J. Swift. Hubbard was wearing tinted glasses because of the eye injury, and occasionally used a cane to walk. This didn’t mean he couldn’t see, and it didn’t mean he couldn’t walk or drive.

“I have evidence you do not have and don’t even appear to even know exists.”

J. Swift, I’m not competing with you.

I encourage you to not only confirm for yourself the evidence I’ve presented, but to do your own independent research into NATS or any area that you feel needs it.

Margaret, you are doing nothing but TR3’ing here (repeating the command) that Hubbard flew home and was a war hero. You have failed to conclusively establish anything with evidence. You have a theory that you want to up-engineer into Hubbard being a war hero. As you seem unable or unwilling to accept the fact that LRH was a proven liar on many topics, I look forward to your next website: L. Ron Hubbard Nuclear Physicist.

Your evidence here is neither exhaustive nor conclusive. I have evidence you do not have and don’t even appear to even know exists. I produced a declassified NATS schedule to make that point. As for Hubbard’s eye injury: Hubbard was reading the medical texts at Oak Knoll while claiming later to Dianetics readers that he was crippled and blind in this period. Hubbard was driving a car and attending writer’s meetings in this period. Moreover, he was sexually active with several women at Jack Parson’s occult free love community after he left Oak Knoll and drove his car 350+ miles from Oakland to Pasadena. Quite a feat for a blind guy.

I will produce my evidence on this section of Hubbard’s life at a time and place of my choosing, perhaps even in an international film or television piece. Your blog is not the right place to present my information.

“you have one aircraft arriving in SF with no NATS or Pan Am passenger log. ”

You’re engaging in circular arguments J. Swift. The entirety of the evidence shows fairly conclusively that Hubbard was flown home, just as he claimed. I’m sorry you’re having a hard time accepting this fact.

“The US Navy accurately corrected Hubbard’s record to reflect this fact; there is nothing sinister in the erasure.”

That would be the erasure of “Combat Intelligence Officer, Asiatic Fleet” from his Officer Fitness Report. So think about what you’re saying. You’re argument is that Hubbard was originally being sent to Manila to be a combat intelligence officer for the Asiatic Fleet, but because the record of this was erased, we can conclude that Hubbard wasn’t really a combat intelligence officer in Australia and/or Java. Do you think there was something special about Australia/Java that would have prevented Hubbard from carrying out his original assignment (using your argument) of being a Combat Intelligence Officer? I mean, if those were *actually* his orders, why wouldn’t he attempt to carry them out in Java, where the US Navy had been moved from Manila?

Regarding Hubbard’s eye injury, you’re conflating his failing eyesight (for which he didn’t get any VA benefits) with his actual eye injury — which was serious enough to garner a quarter of his 40% disability. I’d suggest you re-read my comment above, and the INJURIES section of the website to familiarize yourself with the difference between the two.

And no, no banned IP here. I leave those to Church members and Chris Owen. Also, I would guess that many people avoid wikipedia as a source of reliable information on controversial subjects, as I do. So I’ll just publish my research at my website for now. But thanks for the vote of confidence.

Margaret, you have one aircraft arriving in SF with no NATS or Pan Am passenger log. There are no corroborating records for Hubbard departing Australia by plane or stopping in Pearl Harbor by plane. One can say you are “dubbing in” as you have not found a ship passenger list. Copi applies here:

“In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of proof of its occurrence as positive proof of its non-occurrence. —Copi , Introduction to Logic (1953), p. 95

I have produced a declassified NATS card and suggest you investigate NATS and pre-NATS/Pan Am records. Until then, Hubbard’s theorized flight is not proven by any means; it is an inference on your part. And, Hubbard taking a plane ride does not make him a secret agent.

You can and should speculate to your heart’s delight but please allow me to offer this: If a man as connected as Colonel Prouty couldn’t find the evidence then there is no evidence to be found.

*****
Hubbard never made it to Manila to be attached to the Asiatic Fleet due to the fall of Manila to the Japanese. This is why the pink “Report On The Fitness of Officers” card was erased — Hubbard never served in this capacity. The US Navy accurately corrected Hubbard’s record to reflect this fact; there is nothing sinister in the erasure.

Because Hubbard did not get to Manila and the Asiatic Fleet, the US Navy had to do something with him. This explains why he was, on an ad hoc basis, attached to the US Naval Attache in Brisbane. On this document Hubbard is listed as a Naval Liaison Officer and not a Naval Observer. Aside from whatever Hubbard told a Navy doctor, there are no records for Hubbard being wounded in combat let alone ever fighting in combat. A twisted ankle and eyestrain? Please! Those are not combat injuries.

As to Hubbard’s eyesight: Hubbard’s poor eyesight prevented him from even taking the entrance exams for the Annapolis Naval Academy in 1930. Hubbard had bad eyesight in 1930. His bad eyesight in 1942 is consistent with his bad eyesight in 1930.